The Irish media have given as much coverage to a British singer and the Irish football team because they have not complied with the Free Palestine intimidation campaign, as they have the upcoming national budget on October 6th. Indeed AI research confirmed that there had been over 3,005 verified articles mentioning Israel in 2006 across four major Irish news outlets (we are not yet out of September.) This is not normal. It isn’t. lauraperrins.substack.com/p/…

Government-funded is a term made up by socialists to justify the theft of the middle class.

Hitler SI ERA SOCIALISTA y aca explico por qué. Uno de los argumentos más repetidos para negar cualquier relación entre Hitler y el socialismo consiste en señalar que el régimen nazi persiguió, encarceló y asesinó a comunistas, socialdemócratas y otros socialistas. Pero ese razonamiento contiene un problema lógico, perseguir a una corriente socialista rival no demuestra que quien la persigue sea contrario a toda forma de socialismo. Dos movimientos pueden disputar violentamente el significado de una misma palabra y, precisamente por eso, enfrentarse entre sí. El hecho de que Hitler combatiera al marxismo no demuestra, por sí solo, que rechazara cualquier concepción del socialismo; demuestra que rechazaba el socialismo marxista y pretendía sustituirlo por su propia concepción nacionalista y racial del socialismo. Esto aparece explícitamente en el propio programa de la NSDAP de 1920, presentado por Hitler. El programa exigía, la nacionalización de empresas y trusts, participación de los trabajadores en las ganancias de las grandes empresas, una expansión de las pensiones, la municipalización de los grandes almacenes, una reforma agraria, la expropiación de tierras para fines de utilidad pública y la subordinación de la actividad económica al interés colectivo. El punto 10 establecía que la actividad individual no debía entrar en conflicto con los intereses de la comunidad, sino desarrollarse “en beneficio de todos”; el punto 11 atacaba el ingreso no obtenido mediante trabajo y el punto 25 reclamaba un poder estatal central fuerte. Más importante todavía es que Hitler no ocultaba el uso que hacía del concepto de socialismo. En una entrevista de 1934 explicó que el nacionalsocialismo tomaba de la tradición burguesa la determinación nacional de la idea de un “socialismo vital y creativo”. Definió la Volksgemeinschaft como una comunidad de todo el trabajo productivo y como una superación del individualismo burgués. Es decir, Hitler no decía simplemente “socialismo es una palabra que no significa nada”; afirmaba que el nacionalsocialismo constituía una forma distinta de socialismo y que debía superar tanto al liberalismo burgués como al marxismo. Existe además un testimonio particularmente explícito de su disputa con Otto Strasser sobre el significado del socialismo. Strasser lo acusó de abandonar la revolución social y de colaborar con la derecha burguesa. La respuesta atribuida a Hitler fue: “I am a Socialist, and a very different kind of Socialist”, para inmediatamente distinguir su posición del marxismo. La conversación muestra justamente el problema que suele perderse en el debate actual: Hitler no respondía “yo no soy socialista”; respondía, por el contrario, “soy socialista, pero mi socialismo es diferente”. Al mismo tiempo, su concepción estaba ligada a una jerarquía racial y a la subordinación del individuo al colectivo nacional, por lo que no debe confundirse con el socialismo marxista o igualitario. La misma lógica aparece en Mein Kampf. Allí Hitler rechaza que el Estado deba ser entendido simplemente como una organización destinada a satisfacer necesidades económicas individuales y sostiene que la economía es solamente uno de los instrumentos al servicio de los objetivos superiores de la comunidad. Su concepción política coloca por encima del interés económico individual la preservación y el fortalecimiento de la comunidad nacional. Esto es relevante porque muestra que el eje de su pensamiento económico no era la defensa liberal de la propiedad y del individuo como fines superiores, sino la subordinación de la actividad económica a objetivos políticos, nacionales y colectivos. Por eso, decir simplemente “Hitler no podía ser socialista porque mató socialistas” no resuelve la cuestión histórica. Hitler también persiguió a sectores que compartían con él determinadas palabras, símbolos o preocupaciones sociales, porque rechazaba su interpretación marxista, internacionalista o revolucionaria.

so true

The Gleeful Vengeance of Irish Times luvvies. You can’t hate the @IrishTimes and its fanatical activists enough. Meanwhile, not a peep of a story about the 42% non Irish on the social housing list. Fanatics. @RuadhanIT

‘Ed Sheeran has lost Ireland.’ ‘He will go back to being English.’ This is the current climate in the Irish public sphere. You must say what we want you to say, you must think how we want you to think. If you do not, you are not Irish. The reality of your history doesn’t matter. Your ancestors and their sacrifices do not matter. All that matters, all that determines whether you are ‘one of us’, is that you toe the line. Let’s be clear, Aoife: Ed’s Irish heritage is not yours to take away. His grandparents were Irish, he spent summers here, he has an Irish passport. Ed Sheeran is Irish as a statement of fact that cannot be opposed. Indeed, he has spent a significant part of his career honouring his Irishness: writing songs about our beautiful island and uplifting smaller Irish artists (who subsequently stabbed him in the back at the drop of a hat). Irish identity is not predicated on one’s opinions on the Middle East. The fact that it has been positioned as such by anti-Israel ideologues is abject lunacy that should never have been indulged. Those who scream for a globalised intifada on the streets of Dublin with tricolour keffiyehs do not have a monopoly on Irishness and are not its gatekeepers. Ed Sheeran is most welcome in Ireland and I appreciate his immense efforts over the course of his career to celebrate and promote Irish culture and music. Signed, A proud Irish woman, born of an Irish father and mother, raised in Ireland’s capital. And FYI: my Irishness is not yours to take away either.

He should get a medal!

Day 11 Irish Times delighted to report that my doggy business is closing down. But yet still not a mention of the latest Dublins social housing statistics. Funny world we live in. Which should be bigger news ?

In a free country, you are entitled to believe you are a woman with a penis. But not to take it into a female changing room, nor to cheat your way into a female athletic competition, nor in any way to impose your private delusion on the rest of us. theguardian.com/politics/202…

Correlation ain't causation

Just a reminder that you can get my #economics primer--probably the shortest and easiest way to get economically literate--at no cost ($0.00) from the @MisesBookstore or download the epub, PDF, audiobook, etc. Please share with family, friends, enemies... mises.org/primer

Ireland is a country built around the preferences and political demands of young, progressive voters. Now that it's been built, turns out 70% of them want to leave. Make them stay, I say: johnandsarah.ie/p/irelands-y…

When the flag in the middle is secretly plotting with the flag on the right to throw the flag on the left off the balcony...

Ignorance can be remedied by knowledge, but there's no known cure for stupidity.

I will never forget the shock I felt when @jonronson told me I shouldn't have publicised the 'Karen' WhIte story. White sexually assaulted two women while in a women's prison in West Yorkshire and for some reason, he felt the public should have been kept in the dark about it.

Turkey raided gay bars and LGBTQ groups this week and jailed activists. (BBC, Reuters, & AP.) Same-sex relations aren’t even a crime there. HRC, GLAAD, and Stonewall have not written a word. HRC spent the week posting Senate endorsements. A week of mass arrests. Silence.

I remember those days

Mises was named a Distinguished Fellow of the American Economic Association in 1969 and solved the problem in the literature of applying the new marginal utility theory to units of money but sure he's a punk

The one sector governments left mostly alone delivered forty years of continuous price collapse and it destroyed the central planners' core argument in the process. A transistor that cost $7.50 in 1961 costs less than a millionth of a cent today. Your 2026 smartphone carries more computing power than a 1990 Cray supercomputer that cost $30 million. Storage, bandwidth, processing speed: every metric deflated while quality exploded. This is what markets do when the state steps back. Compare that to healthcare, education, and housing, three sectors drowning in subsidies, licensing regimes, and regulatory capture. Prices in all three outpaced inflation every decade since 1980. Government intervention reprices risk, blocks competition, and rewards incumbents for lobbying instead of innovating. The Federal Reserve spent those same forty years printing money and insisting deflation was catastrophic. Falling prices drive demand, not panic. Intel, Apple, and AMD competed ferociously, drove costs down, and generated trillions in real wealth. Nobody waited to buy a computer because prices might fall next year. Mises identified capital allocation as the economy's core problem: who decides where resources go? Entrepreneurs decided in tech, taking losses when wrong and profits when right. Bureaucrats decided in healthcare and education, socializing losses and mandating consumption. You live with the consequences of that distinction every single day, every time you renew your health insurance and watch the premium climb while your phone bill drops.

Nero debased the Roman currency in 64 AD and lit the fuse on an inflation that burned for two centuries. He reduced the silver content of the denarius from roughly 90% to 75%, and shaved gold coins down in weight simultaneously. The state needed money to rebuild Rome after the fire, fund military campaigns, and finance imperial vanity projects. Minting debased coin was faster than taxation, and it transferred the cost to every Roman holding savings. Prices rose. Merchants adapted. Roman price edicts from later emperors confirm what market actors already figured out: more coins chasing the same goods means each coin buys less(something children are able to grasp, but your local government econoists still denies). You held denarii; the imperial treasury held real goods purchased with freshly debased metal. By the third century, emperors like Gallienus pushed silver content below 5%. Diocletian then issued the Edict on Maximum Prices in 301 AD, threatening death for merchants who charged above his approved rates. Merchants simply stopped selling. Price controls attack the symptom while the debasement continues, producing scarcity as a result. Every move the Roman state made, modern governments copy: outspend revenue, conjure money from nothing, dismiss the fallout, then prosecute anyone who prices accordingly. Inflation is taxation by deception. Rome is but one case in a long historical pattern, running across three thousand years. Only one thing has changed: how fast the currency gets destroyed.